Interview by Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the International Organizations in Vienna Mikhail Ulyanov to «Mizan» news agency

From your point of view, as Russia's chief negotiator in the JCPOA negotiations, what is the perspective of the negotiation process? Is this process moving in the direction of agreement? If not, what are the main reasons for not reaching an agreement?

It’s hard to say anything definitive about the prospects of resumption of the Vienna talks. One year ago, negotiations were suspended – right at the moment when we were almost at the finish line. As of today, we don’t observe any signs of a potential resumption of the talks soon. The reason for this deadlock is the position of the Western countries – Germany, France, the UK and the USA – that seem to have completely lost interest in full restoration of the JCPOA.

Over the past year, Iranian authorities have officially announced many times that they are ready to conclude the JCPOA negotiations. They also emphasized that the US has a dual approach in this regard, that is, despite the exchange of messages, it talks about leaving the JCPOA negotiations out of its Foreign Ministry's instructions. Why did the United States and of course the western parties of the JCPOA refuse to do so despite Iran's announcement of its readiness to conclude negotiations?

Indeed, over the past year the Iranian side has confirmed multiple times its readiness to successfully conclude the negotiations. We highly appreciate this position of Tehran. The problem is that the constructive approach by Iran is not met in an adequate way by the aforementioned Western states. In my view, they are making a huge strategic mistake. Restoration of the JCPOA would have served the interests of all. For Iran it would have meant lifting of the illegal US sanctions, for other participants of the Vienna talks – a significant step towards strengthening the international nonproliferation regime. For the Persian Gulf region this would have created prerequisites for improving the state of affairs in the field of regional security. There is just no real alternative to the Nuclear Deal. The position of Western states is counterproductive and entails risk of uncontrolled escalation. In any case, such a dangerous scenario can’t be excluded.

We recently witnessed the leak of the International Atomic Energy Agency's quarterly report on Iran to the media. After that, there have been reports that the European and American «troika» are trying to prepare a joint statement in order to present and receive the joint signature of other countries in the upcoming meeting of the Board of Governors. What do you think is the reason for leaking the Agency's quarterly reports to the media? What is the probability of issuing a resolution against Iran in the upcoming session of the Board of Governors? What is the purpose of the European and American «troika» in preparing the aforementioned joint statement?

It is true that the reports of the IAEA Director General on Iran are being constantly leaked to the public. We, as well as our Iranian colleagues, have repeatedly drawn the IAEA Secretariat’s attention to the inadmissibility of such leakages, calling for measures as effective as possible to ensure due confidentiality. Unfortunately, so far this has brought no results.

As for the prospects of consideration by the IAEA Board of Governors of the two reports of the IAEA Director General on Iran, it is my hope that the Western countries will refrain from explicit provocative actions. Experience shows that attempts to pass the anti-Iranian resolutions at the Board of Governors have never made and will never make any practical sense. They only guarantee tough countermeasures from Tehran. I think there are reasons to believe that the September session of the Board will go along without a resolution. There will undoubtedly be statements made on the Iranian issue. We can expect a national statement from the US, as well as collective interventions from the E3 and the EU as a whole. There may be some other formats. Normally statements of the Western countries are copy-pasted and contain a long list of complaints and concerns regarding each and every case when certain aspects of the nuclear program of Iran didn’t fit into the JCPOA parameters. Statements of this kind are mostly of a ritual nature. I believe authors of such statements need them for ‘domestic consumption’, as well as to somehow mark that they are also part of the conversation on this topic. I called them ‘ritual’, because if the Western countries truly strived to contribute to returning the nuclear program of Iran to the initial parameters of the JCPOA, they could have done it extremely easily. All is needed for that is to get back to the negotiating table in Vienna and to finalize the package decision to restore the Nuclear Deal that is almost 100% complete except for a couple of lines. Unfortunately, the West isn’t ready to return to real conduct of business. They prefer ‘megaphone diplomacy’, painstakingly enumerating the long list of claims towards Tehran at each and every session of the Board.

What is Russia's assessment of the efforts and initiatives carried out by different countries to revive the JCPOA?

The Vienna talks on the JCPOA restoration were a collective effort by all its participants. Each country contributed to the negotiations process. I’d like to particularly note the role of the Iranian diplomacy. Iranian negotiators were very energetic and efficient in standing for their country’s interests. In addition, I can highlight contributions by China, the US, as well as the European External Action Service, that participated at the talks in the capacity of coordinator. I think the Russian diplomacy also played its important part. At least during the negotiations all other participants with no exception on numerous occasions praised the Russian contribution in ensuring progress and finding mutually acceptable solutions in tough situations.